Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:8 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:8;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231207093105.GA28727@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <ivhrgimonsvy3tyj5iidoqmlcyqvtsh2ay3cm3ouemsdbvjzs4@6jlt6zv55tgh>
 <20231208102940.GB28727@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20231208134041.GD28727@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20231208172152.GD36716@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CAADnVQKsnZfFomQ4wTZz=jMZW5QCV2XiXVsi64bghHkAjJtcmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20231208203535.GG36716@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CAADnVQJzCw=qcG+jHBYG0q0SxLPkwghni0wpgV4A4PkpgVbGPw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20231208205241.GK28727@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CAADnVQL3KsJONShsstDq5jrpbc_4FOU-VQPJgDCt50N9asoFzA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20231208224557.GH36716@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <20231208224557.GH36716@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 8 Dec 2023 20:51:27 -0800
Message-ID: <CAADnVQ+Z7UcXXBBhMubhcMM=R-dExk-uHtfOLtoLxQ1XxEpqEA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/cfi,bpf: Fix BPF JIT call
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@meta.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
        Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>,
        Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <llvm@lists.linux.dev>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
        Joao Moreira <joao@overdrivepizza.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 2:46=E2=80=AFPM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org=
> wrote:
>
>
> Ok, did that. Current patches (on top of bpf-next) are here:
>
>   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/peterz/queue.git x86/cfi

Looks really great. The last patch is cleaner than I expected. Good idea.

> (really should try and write better changelogs, but it's too late)

commit logs look fine except the "pilfer" word that I had to look up
in the dictionary :)

> [  247.721063]  ? bpf_throw+0x9b/0xf0
> [  247.721126]  ? bpf_test_run+0x108/0x350
> [  247.721191]  ? bpf_prog_5555714b685bf0cf_exception_throw_always_1+0x26=
/0x26
> [  247.721301]  ? bpf_test_run+0x108/0x350
> [  247.721368]  bpf_test_run+0x212/0x350
> [  247.721433]  ? slab_build_skb+0x22/0x110
> [  247.721503]  bpf_prog_test_run_skb+0x347/0x4a0
>
> But I'm too tired to think staight. Is  this a bpf_callback_t vs
> bpf_exception_cb difference?

Yep.
It's easy to fix:
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
index 0e162eae8639..e36b3f41751e 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
@@ -1484,7 +1484,7 @@ struct bpf_prog_aux {
        int cgroup_atype; /* enum cgroup_bpf_attach_type */
        struct bpf_map *cgroup_storage[MAX_BPF_CGROUP_STORAGE_TYPE];
        char name[BPF_OBJ_NAME_LEN];
-       unsigned int (*bpf_exception_cb)(u64 cookie, u64 sp, u64 bp);
+       u64 (*bpf_exception_cb)(u64 cookie, u64 sp, u64 bp, u64, u64);
 #ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY
        void *security;
 #endif
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
index fe229b28e4a9..650ebe8ff183 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
@@ -2537,7 +2537,7 @@ __bpf_kfunc void bpf_throw(u64 cookie)
         * which skips compiler generated instrumentation to do the same.
         */
        kasan_unpoison_task_stack_below((void *)(long)ctx.sp);
-       ctx.aux->bpf_exception_cb(cookie, ctx.sp, ctx.bp);
+       ctx.aux->bpf_exception_cb(cookie, ctx.sp, ctx.bp, 0, 0);
        WARN(1, "A call to BPF exception callback should never return\n");
 }

and with that all of test_progs runs successfully without CFI panics.
*happy dance*

Only test_progs -t btf/line_info fails suspiciously.
There we check that line info embedded in the prog looks sane.
New cfi preamble is probably tripping something.
It could be a test issue. I'll investigate. It's not a blocker.

Do you mind resending the whole set so that BPF CI can test it
on different archs ?